Drawings and design from live projects.

One of the most common questions we're asked is a simple one: "is this wall load bearing, or can I just knock it through?" Before any internal wall is removed to open up a kitchen-diner or through-lounge, it needs checking — a wall that is carrying floor, roof or another wall above cannot simply be taken down without putting a beam in its place.

We carry out a site survey to establish whether the wall is load bearing (structural) or a non-load-bearing partition (a "stud wall" or dividing wall). That means looking at what sits above it — the direction the floor joists run, whether a wall or roof loads onto it, and how the property is built — rather than guessing from the wall's thickness alone.

The survey gives you a clear answer and, where the wall is structural, tells you exactly what is needed to remove it safely: typically a steel beam (an RSJ, or steel lintel) with properly designed padstones or bearings at each end. Where the wall turns out to be non-structural, we can confirm it is safe to take down without a beam, saving you unnecessary cost.

You'll receive a written assessment suitable for your builder and, where a beam is required, structural calculations and a beam specification for Building Control — everything needed to knock through with confidence.

Class Q permitted development turns on a single structural test: is the existing building genuinely capable of conversion, or would the scheme depend on new primary structure to stand up? Planning Practice Guidance and recent appeal decisions are explicit that Class Q is a conversion right, not a rebuild right — and a prior approval submission lives or dies on whether the structural evidence supports that distinction.

The survey opens with a full visual inspection of the frame — principal posts, tie beams, purlins and rafters — recording species, section sizes, connection type and condition, alongside the walling (masonry, weatherboarding or clad panels) that encloses each bay. Decay, insect attack, historic alteration, out-of-plumb movement and any prior repairs are logged bay-by-bay, cross-referenced to an annotated plan and elevation so every finding can be traced back to a specific structural element.

That record is then set against the proposed layout: which frame members, floor structure and roof coverings are retained as-is, which are repaired in kind, and — critically — confirmation that no new load-bearing elements, foundations or structural floors are introduced to make the building stand up. Where an element is found to be beyond economic repair, the report distinguishes a genuine like-for-like replacement from a change that would tip the scheme into "rebuild" territory and outside the scope of Class Q.

The output is a structural appraisal report, submitted as a formal part of the prior approval application alongside the architect's drawings and the planning consultant's statement of case, giving the local planning authority a defensible, evidenced basis for confirming the building is structurally capable of conversion without new structural elements.